Questions on peg out for new house build

Hi. We are building a new home, and have just had the old one demolished and the plot levelled.

I asked the surveyor to return to ‘peg out the house’.

I was expecting they would put in a few pegs, one at the exact location of each corner of the house.

Instead they have put in a few pegs on the boundary of the plot, appearing to conform to a grid of some sort. The pegs appear to mention their distance from the boundary of the house.

I think there are 5 or 6 pegs in total.

I guess the pegs provide enough information for the builder to find the exact corner points himself, but it seems odd that he should have to do this (risking the mistakes of a 2 step process). I thought the entire purpose of using a surveyor was to get some unequivocal marks from an acknowledged authority.

Have I got my money’s worth ? Is this how a peg out should be done ?

The builder will return in a week and will no doubt know what is going on. I ask because I would like to independently understand the process and get any shortcomings rectified before then.

Cheers
Arron


Ps. Also, under the builders instruction I asked them to indicate the rl level. I can’t see where they have done this, but don’t really know what to look for. What is the usual convention here?

Arron your surveyor has done exactly what is required, they do not mark the corners because as soon as you start excavation for your piers they are lost so they do offsets that can be referenced throughout the slab process.
There will also be a height reference most likely on the kerb but it will be noted on their survey plan.
When your slab is formed they will need to do a check survey to confirm it is in the correct position before the concrete pour.

Ok, thanks for the reply.

I didn’t know about the check survey. More cost. Well no-one said the process was cheap.

Cheers
Arron

Check your CC documentation or with your Certifier as it will be a condition or a requirement of them if it is required
Wont your builder be sorting all of this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardy

Check your CC documentation or with your Certifier as it will be a condition or a requirement of them if it is required
Wont your builder be sorting all of this?

---

Yes, the builder will be sorting this out. However I have found by experience that it’s good to have some independent knowledge of the process.

I’m reminded of a neighbour at a previous property who built a 5 bedroom seaside house. Midway through the process, just as the bricklayers were at about chest-height, council learned that the location of the house was 1m from where it should be. They were required to tear it all down. Even the slab had to be removed and rebuilt. Council has a zero tolerance policy in this case because it was a waterside property and the encroachment was towards the water. I was renovating our house across the road while this all happened and watched it unfold. Everyone blamed everyone else - or that’s how it seemed to me although I guess no-one really felt compelled to tell an interested stranger the real truth. The owner told me they were the innocent party and that it cost them $250k and nearly a year of delay (maybe true, maybe not). I resolved that if I ever built I would make sure I was across what was going on - even if it meant asking stupid questions and making a bit of a nuisance of myself. My main aim is to check the location of the house myself, as this is hugely contentious with our neighbours who went legal on us and will jump on any infringement.

Cheers
And thanks again

We are starting a new build at the moment as well. The final site survey was done last Monday and like you I was expecting to see more marks on the ground. They have just pegged the corners on the block. With all the technology these days I don't think they use timber 'hurdles' and string lines any more to locate the corners and piers etc. They must just fire up a laser guided box that has the site plan or engineering plan fed into it.

A couple of years ago we put a new kitchen in the current house and when it came to do the bench tops the maker came in and set up a tripod in the center of the kitchen that had a 'pen' on a string that pulled out from the tripod. He just touched the pen to all the corners of where bench tops would go. A few days later they returned with the fabricated stone benches that all fitted perfectly!

Taking it to the next level there are already experimental '3D printed' houses around.

Just thinking.

As always, this forum delivers the answers.

This forum really is the best place possible for timely expert answers on anything practical - from people with no axe to grind and no product to sell.

Good luck with the build.
Our neighbours put a complaint into council when we put a second story on and complained continually about our trees.
Years later they waited until we were in Canada to chop down all their trees, put in a pool and granny flat and conc what was left.
H.

How come the inspector didn't pick up on the incorrect location at first inspection ie footings?

Aaron, I drove past our site this morning and another team have now been there and pegged out for the slab. Apparently different class of surveyors for different tasks.
:U

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arron

Yes, the builder will be sorting this out. However I have found by experience that it’s good to have some independent knowledge of the process.

I’m reminded of a neighbour at a previous property who built a 5 bedroom seaside house. Midway through the process, just as the bricklayers were at about chest-height, council learned that the location of the house was 1m from where it should be. They were required to tear it all down. Even the slab had to be removed and rebuilt. Council has a zero tolerance policy in this case because it was a waterside property and the encroachment was towards the water. I was renovating our house across the road while this all happened and watched it unfold. Everyone blamed everyone else - or that’s how it seemed to me although I guess no-one really felt compelled to tell an interested stranger the real truth. The owner told me they were the innocent party and that it cost them $250k and nearly a year of delay (maybe true, maybe not). I resolved that if I ever built I would make sure I was across what was going on - even if it meant asking stupid questions and making a bit of a nuisance of myself. My main aim is to check the location of the house myself, as this is hugely contentious with our neighbours who went legal on us and will jump on any infringement.

Cheers
And thanks again

---

aarrrh so your going to be one of those clients......builders love them. Every second day you would hear
“ how come you are doing that? I read on the internet that you should be doing it this way” lol. And then you would have to give them a quick lesson and justify your actions, it must be far worse for doctors and self Google diagnosis.
Just joking, nothing wrong with knowing what is happening.

Good luck with the build, my best advice is to maintain a good relationship with your builder to get the best end result.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rustynail

How come the inspector didn't pick up on the incorrect location at first inspection ie footings?

---

I assumed it wasn’t picked up because the private certifier is concerned with the conformance to building codes, not with the accuracy of the peg out. Put another way, if the building is initially pegged out wrong, how would the certifier know it was wrong ? Does the certifier carry survey equipment and do a survey themselves to check the original survey.

Anyway, it’s a question that could be asked of anyone involved in the build. It’s a big house on a small block - didn’t the builder notice that the house wasn’t sitting right. Didn’t anyone notice that it wasn’t lined up with the setback of the other houses on the water side. Take a metre off a tiny back yard, isn’t it noticeable to anyone with the plans in their hand. Nonetheless it got through multiple inspections.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fuzzie

Aaron, I drove past our site this morning and another team have now been there and pegged out for the slab. Apparently different class of surveyors for different tasks.
:U

---

Was it another team of surveyors, or was it the builder ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arron

Was it another team of surveyors, or was it the builder ?

---

Project Home builder. The client is pretty much in the dark about the process and not allowed on site unless accompanied by the job supervisor who I haven't even met yet! All the details down to the last tile and light fitting have had to be signed off prior to the build commencing. I gather each step of the build will be on a project plan held by the supervisor and subbed out appropriately as needed in sequence. The site relocation survey was a separate step and I guess done by a different group to pegging out the slab. I've been told the drainers will be on site Monday, they will need to know exactly where to run the plumbing as will the crew doing the screw piles. I don't know how they measured up for the slab peg out, it would have been interesting to see how they referenced off the site pegs.

Ok everyone, pay attention, there will be an exam at the end of this lesson.
After contracts are signed, the builder organises surveyor to do pegout and as has been noted above OFFSET pegs are placed usually 4 depending on complexity of design and site topography. Typically on lots up to 1000 sq m the pegs are placed on the boundary line OR offset either 1m or 2 m relative to LH and RH side of building but IN LINE WITH front and rear of building.
Next step, the concreter is given a copy of the surveyors pegout WITH THE OFFSET measurements, he then does 1 of 2 steps, either places a peg with a clout indicating every corner of the building OR sets up perimeter formwork boards to the shape of the building.
Next the plumber/drainer installs the drainage referencing off the pegs or formwork with top edge at finished slab heaight (assuming its a waffle pod slab). If its a traditional slab on ground, the concreter will dig all the beams, prepare the infill ground between beams to height of underside of slab prior to drainer, then after drainer place blinding sand, plastic, etc. In some cases it may even be required for the electrician to install conduits and draw wires.
Once the concreter has the slab ready to pour, a check survey is done IF IT IS A CONDITION OF THE BUILDING APPROVAL (a prudent builder would have this done regardless especially on today's handkerchief sized blocks), it is then inspected by the engineer and certifier.
All the above steps WILL BE INCLUDED in your contract price with exception of matters arising from contingency clauses.

Rwbuild has given a good, clear explanation of the process, but it still goes wrong sometimes. My Physiotherapist is currently having a granny flat built at the rear of his practice. It has a steel frame floor built on steel piles set in concrete. It has a ramp from the practice to the granny flat. Last week, in the wee small hours of the morning, his wife said "They've got the floor level wrong. We need to go up there and check." They did, and she was correct, so when the builder arrived she fronted him, and he behaved as per Beardy's description. When she insisted he check, he was just a bit red faced. They'd excavated 1m too much, and the floor levels were 1m too low. When I arrived, they were cutting lengths of steel for pile extensions. On Tuesday, it looked like the eaves of the two buildings were going to intersect. Tomorrow, I shall no doubt hear the story.

There may well be two types of surveyor at work. Establishing the boundaries may be done by, or under the immediate supervision of, a licensed surveyor, depending on a few things. The set-out for the building may be done by a technician surveyor. As a hydrographer, I always envied my terrestrial surveyor colleagues, who had the luxury of putting in pegs to hold the ground still while they measured it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexS

....... I always envied my terrestrial surveyor colleagues, who had the luxury of putting in pegs to hold the ground still while they measured it.

---

I haven't had that problem since I stopped drinking with engineering students. :drunk22:

Try surveying in an underground mine..........

Having been one of those surveyors (now retired but previously a registered surveyor with engineering endorsement) who enjoyed the "luxury of putting in pegs to hold the ground still while they measured it" all I can say is that times, and practices are changing very rapidly in the surveying world. As is the legislative and procedural requirements for compliance with surveying, planning and building legislation, regulations and codes.

In all states "cadastral surveyors" (marking property boundaries) must be "registered" and certain other survey specialists (engineering, mining, hydrographic etc) may be required to be firstly "registered as a surveyor" under the survey legislation. Their fitness to maintain "registration" and their "competence" to hold various "endorsements" is assessed annually under a "competency assessment framework." A "registered surveyor" is able to hold multiple "endorsements" i.e. "cadastral", "engineering", "mining" and "consulting". Under the legislation in most states a surveyor (or another person) must not perform say a "cadastral survey" for the general public or a builder etc (i.e. consult) unless they are currently a "registered surveyor" who holds both "consulting" and "cadastral" "endorsements".

So in this instance a "cadastral surveyor" performs a "cadastral survey" to "mark new corners" or to "identify the existing corners" of a lot to confirm the ownership and location of the "lot". The same individual may also place "engineering marks" i.e. building offset pegs, or as often the case another "registered surveyor", from the same firm or perhaps another firm, who holds an "engineering endorsement" will place the offset pegs. That situation varies between states, as some states do not require "engineering surveyors" to be "registered" or to hold the "engineering" or "consulting" "endorsements." Some of those tasks may be delegated to a "surveying associate" or "graduate surveyor" working under the supervision of a "registered surveyor" who holds the appropriate endorsements.

The survey legislation and regulations also impose obligations upon "registered cadastral surveyors" to prepare plans of "cadastral surveys" which must be lodged with the registering authority within a specified time frame after completion of the "cadastral survey."

"Registered engineering surveyors" though not compelled by legislation or regulations will also supply a "plan of marks placed" clearly and unambiguously showing the offset (if any) to the building or works being set out to their client. They will usually liase with the client on their preferred marking of offset pegs, i.e. 2m offset to front / rear building corners and in line with said face; some request 4 pegs placed at corners of 2m offset lines to all faces so that profiles can be installed on those 2m offsets. More technically advanced builders may request a "data file" to upload into their own survey total stations, or to set out earthworks and to control automated machine guided concrete screeds where no "offset pegs" are actually placed, only a "control mark network."

Prudent builders and owners will insist on an "identification survey" of the "lot" before commencing any ground works, and should insist on the "building works" or any controlled "development works" be set out by a "registered surveyor."

Quite often a builder or owner may want to "save money" by not having the appropriate surveys performed. As the "waterfront case" above and numerous other very expensive and time consuming "stuff up's" attest to that is false economy, and always leads to the blame circle where everyone insists it was some one else's fault. Often the financial losses start at 10 to 20 times the cost and more of a survey.

Registered surveyors with consulting and cadastral endorsements must hold professional indemnity insurances etc and are experts in location accuracy. Many mortagee's insist on the completion of both cadastral and building setout (engineering) surveys as a condition within the mortgage documents.

Having been heavily involved in the surveying professional institutions and the provision of continuing professional development all I can say is that the surveying profession in general is quite well managed and very aware of the consequences of "getting it wrong." Its hair raising to see the financial losses incurred when it goes "pear shaped" and some of the claims and counter claims for damages made after a stuff up!

In the late 80's a group of houses were being built in Paraburdoo for the Channar mine project, I was involved in delivering the concrete for the slabs. One slab got poured back to front, wasn't discovered until it was time to erect the house. They eventually broke the slab up and redid it correctly. I wasn't privvey to all the finger pointing that would have gone on but have wondered ever since how it could happen when other slabs in the vicinity were laid correctly.
Cheers,
Geoff.

I know of one project home built on the wrong block. The negotiations with the block owner would of been interesting but didn’t hear the final outcome
I suspect it was a clerical error not a surveying one though

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardy

I know of one project home built on the wrong block. The negotiations with the block owner would of been interesting but didn’t hear the final outcome
I suspect it was a clerical error not a surveying one though

---

Certainly not a rare event. One example used in QLD for cadastral reinstatement (remarking boundaries from previous surveys) education was of a Surveyor, lets just call him Bob for ease of communication, who accepted "evidence" of old "survey marks" as being from the original cadastral survey of an inner city suburb in Brisbane. Many surveyors followed on from Bob's survey reinstatement, until one surveyor (Fred) many decades later disputed Bob's "evidence." Fred's "evidence" was far more compelling and thorough, and proved that Bob may have made an error in accepting his evidence. The "error" effectively displaced lots a short distance sideways, with buildings over time having been built to the boundary of many of the affected lots.

Over time land in the suburb had become quite valuable, with single residences being replaced by multi unit complexes. Planning laws had also changed to permit development of lots using the area to calculate the number of units permitted (much simplified for explanation). Over the years several court cases have proceeded on the grounds that the erroneous re-survey had created "encroachments" with disaffected owners seeking compensation or attempting to resolve the "error" to correct their titles and to permit them to build more units on the lot. A chain reaction in effect, solve one owners problem then create two more problems for their adjoining owners.

Other example have included the first owner to build in a new subdivision, mistakenly building on the adjoining lot, then others simply saying my lot is next door, or 4 lots down etc. The status quo remained for decades until one lot was to be sold with the prospective purchaser insisting on an "identification survey." Only then was the error found, which effectively meant the owner of Lot 1 had built their house on lot 2 etc. That has been a nightmare to resolve due to the variance in quality and valuation of homes. Some owners were prepared to simply "swap" lots through a transfer of Title with others insisting they wanted "their" lot, with the more valuable house of course.

One could go on ...

There’s several houses down here on the river, built back in the days where people “just knocked something up in the Christmas holidays”, that are over the boundaries, one is so far out as to be half on a council reserve and half on their own block. When time came to sell it, it was an absolute nightmare, cost a lot of money to get sorted out.
I personally have had to chainsaw a back corner off a place at Bar Point that was encroaching on the neighbours land snd they insisted that it was rectified as they wanted to sell.
Surveyors are worth every dollar they charge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by riverbuilder

Surveyors are worth every dollar they charge.

---

Very true! Reviews of survey legislation occurred post "Hilmer", remember that - 1993 National Competition Policy Review. "Hilmer" opened up some industries to competition but maintained dominant regulation in some areas in the "public interest." Cadastral Surveying and confidence in Titles to ownership of land was deemed to be one such area, however all states reviewed their survey legislation, and regulations.

Many changes to how surveys were to be conducted, land registry authorities requirements etc occurred, particularly the introduction of the "competency assessment framework" and "endorsements" as well as mandatory actions registered surveyors must undertake when in the course of their surveys they discover matters that affect their client or the owners of adjoining lots. Building, and other controlled development "encroachments" were one such matter. Historically some "encroachments" were left in the "let sleeping dogs lie" basket, however that is no longer an option for registered cadastral surveyors in most states.

Some years ago when I was supervising for a project builder had a job that backed onto a reserve. House was peged, concreter starts and because there was a reasonable amount of fill at the back of the house after creating the platform for the slab it had to be piered. Concreter merrily drilling away , hits something hard, not unusual, probably a rock, puts rock auger on rig, punches down, then auger drops 1.0m instantly then hard again. He immediately what it was, sewer main, main truck line for that portion of the subdivision. MWSDB had already approved the plans and not in the zone of influence. Yeah, right, when they laid the main their own surveyor had stuffed up big time. It affected about 10 houses and it cost the MWSDB big $'s for those 10 houses when they were built, they opted to pier and bridge the main, was cheaper than doing a new main and they accepted all responsibility indefinitely.

Another case was a company I had just started with and it was 3 weeks before completion of a townhouse development at Blacktown that backed onto the main western rail line.
The works as executed final survey had been submitted to the railways and they said the drainage easement was in error, the invert at the boundary was 100mm lower than the discharge rail easement 300m away. I had to meet 2 of there engineering people on site to try and resolve the issue. I asked them for their copy of the RL's for their existing easement that was given to our engineer to do thee design for the development, yes, you guessed it, their surveyor had transposed the invert at each end of the rail easement, they had to redo their own easement.

How often did the old surveys get it wrong? Our current house is on a relatively old parcel for the Gold Coast. The house was build in the 70's on a subdivision of a subdivision. Not long after purchasing I discovered a couple of survey pegs for our fence line on the accessible parts of our block (the rear 1/3 was overgrown and on a 1 in 1 slope down into bushland). One peg is at the top of the start of the steep drop off, the other is 2m past our front fence on the nature strip. I've never wanted to open that potential can of worms although I've always wondered. I'm pretty certain it's a peg for our lot as nothing similar is visible in the street on neighbouring properties although there are RL screws at various points along the concrete kerbs. There's also a V chiseled into the kerb on the other side of the block that looks like it might be a matching mark for the opposite corner where a peg couldn't be put in. I've wondered if most of the nature strip might actually be on our land.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwbuild

Some years ago when I was supervising for a project builder had a job that backed onto a reserve. House was peged, concreter starts and because there was a reasonable amount of fill at the back of the house after creating the platform for the slab it had to be piered. Concreter merrily drilling away , hits something hard, not unusual, probably a rock, puts rock auger on rig, punches down, then auger drops 1.0m instantly then hard again. He immediately what it was, sewer main, main truck line for that portion of the subdivision. MWSDB had already approved the plans and not in the zone of influence. Yeah, right, when they laid the main their own surveyor had stuffed up big time. It affected about 10 houses and it cost the MWSDB big $'s for those 10 houses when they were built, they opted to pier and bridge the main, was cheaper than doing a new main and they accepted all responsibility indefinitely.

---

The main sewer in our street runs along the top of the drop off into the reserve behind us. It runs through the rear portion of a lot of blocks. The area was sewered well after the houses were built in the 70's. When we renovated 19 years ago we requested all available old construction and drainage plans from the Council. Nothing showed the sewer and no easements are noted on any documentation we have seen or show up in title searches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fuzzie

The main sewer in our street runs along the top of the drop off into the reserve behind us. It runs through the rear portion of a lot of blocks. The area was sewered well after the houses were built in the 70's. When we renovated 19 years ago we requested all available old construction and drainage plans from the Council. Nothing showed the sewer and no easements are noted on any documentation we have seen or show up in title searches.

---

Most councils / local authorities were pretty diligent in recording sewers installed, when we got rid of outback dunnies, by performing quite detailed engineering surveys for their design & construction and "as built surveys" after construction. The sewer invert, connection, jump up, locations & levels were recorded on those plans as offsets from boundaries and other improvements, which over time some of those "more permanent improvements" have gone.

Under the Land Act (leased lands) & Titles Acts (freehold lands) in most states at the time of construction of those sewers there was no legal requirement to envelope those sewers in "easements" though some were created for major trunk sewers, particularly those into sewerage treatment works. To this day in most states sewer lines in / through residential lots are not in "easements" because the economics of creating the easements are a burden that is passed onto consumers (land purchasers.)

Sewer Levels were referenced to councils (or their consultants) level datums & their own permanent survey mark (those brass discs you see in kerbs, footpaths & the like.) control networks which were pretty much unique to each council. Railways & Main Roads also had their independent level networks, so there were numerous "level datums" in existence and it was not a straight forward task to reconcile them.

In the early 1970's the Australian Height Datum (AHD) was introduced to resolve the confusion and to force all engineering, and control surveys onto the one homogeneous Australia wide level datum. That process was hugely successful but has had some "local anomalies" and more systemic errors as we are now discovering through advanced modelling and better measurement tools, precision GPS etc. So historically confusion between say railways and a local council were more the norm rather than an exception until the AHD evolved.

In fact the sewerage plans were mostly prepared by consultant engineering firms such as GH&D etc and are a very valuable record of "improvements" (sheds, buildings, houses etc, even chook runs) on lots at the time of survey. Some councils have realized their historical & technical worth and have preserved those engineering survey plans, some have destroyed them. Now with most councils using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) the transfer of survey data & information contained on those historical plans has not always been faithful or accurate with most systems permitting "source / quality identifiers" which gives an indication of the positional quality of the data. Imperfect but its the best we've got.

When the records are gone, or difficult to access, and the "old timers" who had a record in their memories / grey matter also moved on problems emerged as Fuzzie has mentioned, water mains, telco cables, sewers, drainage lines got "found" by not so ideal means, and not always immediately. :- I've had first hand experience several times when a builder's / telco's / road construction / drainage crews day has literally "gone to $hit." :oo: Nothing gets ones attention more so than a "fountain" or some "blind mullets" swimming by, as the colourful language flies. I've lost count of the number of times my schedule went to crap, after an unplanned discover was made by one of our construction crews, despite a rather diligent design process. Some were funny, others a bloody nightmare and very expensive to resolve. The locals tend to get a bit ancy :(( when a contractor takes out the telco network, phones, EFTPOS, data etc for the whole CBD of a major regional city, or a trunk water main in a significant CBD intersection.

Level and survey control networks are a dynamic entity, they are constantly evolving, particularly as computing resources became more sophisticated and permitted "network adjustments" over vast areas to improve the quality of the data and to resolve some of those "local anomalies." So historically the positional data (vertical level / height, & hz position & connections) on most if not all "permanent survey marks" have been revised / updated in those "network adjustments," and with the latest survey datums the positional data is actually dynamic (x,y,z + date & time.)

So land surveyors didn't always have it easy as Alex suggests. :p Plus we now know that the land / continents are drifting, through now measurable drift observable via precision GPS techniques. :wink:

I was so glad when AHD was introduced...or though t I would be. Unfortunately, there were so many other height data in use, that converting them to AHD was nigh impossible. One of my favourites was River Murray Lock Site Datum. After going through ancient documents and connecting to other known RMs, I came to the conclusion that it was created by the authorities deciding that at a particular time and date, the water level at any point on the Murray was (say) RL100.00' RMLSD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexS

I was so glad when AHD was introduced...or though t I would be. Unfortunately, there were so many other height data in use, that converting them to AHD was nigh impossible. One of my favourites was River Murray Lock Site Datum. After going through ancient documents and connecting to other known RMs, I came to the conclusion that it was created by the authorities deciding that at a particular time and date, the water level at any point on the Murray was (say) RL100.00' RMLSD.

---

I feel your pain!

There are some interesting stories about, one I recall was an ex-Surveyor General of QLD who was nick named "six foot Kev" and it wasn't about his physical stature either. Some levelling mistakes your mates will never let you forget.

Or dealing with "mine grids." I recall seeking transformation parameters (for the non-surveyors - allows conversion from one grid to another, x,y,z offsets + rotation (if any)) from a colleague for the Phosphate Hill mine site. "Which one?" he replies "we know of at least seven, but there may be others, so do you know which one the plan you have is based on?" My reply, "Ah, No, you know because the engineer only photo copied the part he was interested in, and didn't get the important part as well (the title block with critical data like vert & Hz datum info)."

Arron, have you been given any info on the set out from your builder or their surveyor/s?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobyturns

Arron, have you been given any info on the set out from your builder or their surveyor/s?

---

The position of the house with offset from boundaries will be on the site plan of the signed contract. The builder is not obliged to provide any more set out detail other than that on the plans however a lending authority may make it a condition of any loan. There is nothing stopping a client from asking for more detail but that would be a cordial agreement between builder and client unless it was a condition of the contract.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arron

I ask because I would like to independently understand the process and get any shortcomings rectified before then.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwbuild

The position of the house with offset from boundaries will be on the site plan of the signed contract. The builder is not obliged to provide any more set out detail other than that on the plans however a lending authority may make it a condition of any loan. There is nothing stopping a client from asking for more detail but that would be a cordial agreement between builder and client unless it was a condition of the contract.

---

Yes, the setbacks, the lot building envelope, location of the building is shown on the building designers plans for the purpose of development / building approval, site setout etc however Arron was seeking to check that the process was progressing without confusion or mistakes in communication etc.

As the client he should receive a copy of any cadastral survey plans (identification survey) and a copy of the plan / sketch prepared by the surveyor who set out the building location on the lot.

Irrespective of any formal obligation, any builder worth their salt would provide copies of those plans to their client if they engaged the surveyor/s on behalf of the client or in the course of their contract with the client, firstly to allay any concerns and as proof that they are diligent in protecting their clients interests.

My father was a builder in Far North QLD for a couple of decades so I am very familiar with a builders perspective. The small things that keep the client confident that you are protecting their interests is well worth making the effort and pays off handsomely in building a sound relationship with the client and IF the chips do fall.

If a builder refuses to supply the surveyors building set out plan / sketch upon request, or cannot offer sufficient explanation as to the who & how the building location on the ground was arrived at, then as a client I would certainly have concerns about the process and the builders motivation/s. Saving on costs perhaps??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobyturns

Yes, the setbacks, the lot building envelope, location of the building is shown on the building designers plans for the purpose of development / building approval, site setout etc however Arron was seeking to check that the process was progressing without confusion or mistakes in communication etc.

As the client he should receive a copy of any cadastral survey plans (identification survey) and a copy of the plan / sketch prepared by the surveyor who set out the building location on the lot.

Irrespective of any formal obligation, any builder worth their salt would provide copies of those plans to their client if they engaged the surveyor/s on behalf of the client or in the course of their contract with the client, firstly to allay any concerns and as proof that they are diligent in protecting their clients interests.

My father was a builder in Far North QLD for a couple of decades so I am very familiar with a builders perspective. The small things that keep the client confident that you are protecting their interests is well worth making the effort and pays off handsomely IF the chips do fall.

---

Sorry but I agree with Ray, it is a requirement of the Certifier to ensure the building is in the correct position as part of the slab inspection.The Certifier by law is engaged by the client, they cannot be engaged by the builder so the Certifier can confirm the formalities with the client.

The builder may like to show the client the peg out etc but can also say mind your own business. It gets up my nose that clients think it is a free for all and they are entitled to know everything that is going on. When you hand your building block over to your builder it is then a business workplace not yours and builders have been heavily penalised and even face jail sentences for injuries in their workplace.
How many other industries and professions allow their clients through the back doors into their workplace to see the ins and outs of what is going on and looking over the workers shoulder?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardy

Sorry but I agree with Ray, it is a requirement of the Certifier to ensure the building is in the correct position as part of the slab inspection.The Certifier by law is engaged by the client, they cannot be engaged by the builder so the Certifier can confirm the formalities with the client.

---

Umm, not sure that is correct. Our Builder engaged the certifier and clearly arranges all the inspections to occur at the appropriate time. That scheduling can only be done efficiently by the Site Construction Manager to work in with the trades as per the project plan. In fact wouldn't it be the Builder's own Engineers that did the design that would need to certify it had been constructed to design? An onsite inspection by the Client (and possibly his agent, Quantity Surveyor or such) is allowed on site at various times during the build to check things are going to plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fuzzie

Umm, not sure that is correct. Our Builder engaged the certifier and clearly arranges all the inspections to occur at the appropriate time. That scheduling can only be done efficiently by the Site Construction Manager to work in with the trades as per the project plan. In fact wouldn't it be the Builder's own Engineers that did the design that would need to certify it had been constructed to design? An onsite inspection by the Client (and possibly his agent, Quantity Surveyor or such) is allowed on site at various times during the build to check things are going to plan.

---

Your builder may have arranged a Certifier that they are used to working with but they cannot legally engage them, you would of signed an agreement with the Certifier in the raft of documents you signed with the building contract so the legal obligation is Property Owner and Certifier but in the documentation you would of signed an authorisation that allows your builder to contact them to arrange inspection times on your behalf. This is done for efficiency and simplicity of coordination of inspections.
The engineer be they one the client or builder engaged to do the design will do a site inspection pre concrete pour to ensure it is structurally adequate as per their design but they are not interested in if it is in the correct position or correct size, that is why the surveyor is engaged.
The banks used to always do inspections before releasing funds but in the last 10ish years I have noticed they very rarely do them as they don’t want to be held responsible/ accountable for any inspections ( there has been litigation in this area) they do so instead have the client sign a document authorising the release of the funds and that they are satisfied the work has reached that stage.

There is is no issue with clients wanting to inspect their home during the building process but it needs to be done with the builders permission to ensure their safety. I had one client who repeatedly enter the building site without permission despite numerous requests for them to contact us first to arrange a viewing at a mutually acceptable time which is also a contractual condition in our contracts so we stopped work on their project until they gave a written undertaking that they would stop doing it. It did take 3 weeks of no work before he agreed ( he was a nutcase)

We must keep in mind that there are differences in procedural matters for building & development approval, inspections, certification, etc between states due to the differences in planning and development legislation. I have been attempting to keep my comments re the surveyors responsibilities & contributions in the building process as general as possible.

In NSW part of the certifiers responsibility is "check that all applicable preconditions for building or subdivision work are met before work starts or a certificate is issued." That may include "site surveys" where deemed necessary.

A certifier is competent to assess the planning / development / building application, and to conduct inspections at prescribed stages of construction. They are not competent to "certify" that the building or any development works are in the correct position relative to the cadastre (property boundaries) or in fact on the correct lot, that is not their role or responsibility. However they are responsible as part of their development application assessment for verifying that documentation, the surveyors plan/s *, accompanying the application does "certify" the proposed building / development works location, occupation on the correct lot etc.

The development application form and checklists contain a process flow chart for submission requirements.

* "Registered Site survey plans - prepared & signed by Registered Surveyor with Registration Number (A1 size, 1:200 scale)."


https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/Asse...AEC1913FE.ashx

This is a handy reference about the surveyors role, particularly the section on "Identification surveys"

Consulting Surveyors NSW

Quote:

---

There are some interesting stories about, one I recall was an ex-Surveyor General of QLD who was nick named "six foot Kev" and it wasn't about his physical stature either. Some levelling mistakes your mates will never let you forget.

---

That's even worse than an engineer I knew in Vic. who was nicknamed "Half-inch." This progressed to memos for him him addressed to "Mr. R. Finch."